felix dakat wrote:Seems we all agree that whether there is an absolute smallest particle or an infinity of ever smaller particles is a matter of speculation at this point. That's all I'm saying.

I agree. But I'm taking it a bit further - the very idea of "particles" may correspond to our own limitations rather than to some hypothetical mind-independent reality. Is there even such a thing as a "particle"?

"Distraction is the only thing that consoles us for our miseries, and yet it is itself the greatest of our miseries." - Blaise Pascal

felix dakat wrote:Seems we all agree that whether there is an absolute smallest particle or an infinity of ever smaller particles is a matter of speculation at this point. That's all I'm saying.

I agree. But I'm taking it a bit further - the very idea of "particles" may correspond to our own limitations rather than to some hypothetical mind-independent reality. Is there even such a thing as a "particle"?

felix dakat wrote:Seems we all agree that whether there is an absolute smallest particle or an infinity of ever smaller particles is a matter of speculation at this point. That's all I'm saying.

I agree. But I'm taking it a bit further - the very idea of "particles" may correspond to our own limitations rather than to some hypothetical mind-independent reality. Is there even such a thing as a "particle"?

Right...could be just a wave.

Or an angel.

"Distraction is the only thing that consoles us for our miseries, and yet it is itself the greatest of our miseries." - Blaise Pascal

What is fun with the atom/galaxy thing, is nowyou get to fill in bits of thepuzzle on two boards based on trying to matchwhat you see.Like, you can say, "The reason the galaxy has a double-layered spherical halo with different star flow in each layer is because each time thedisc precesses through, it is rotating the opposite direction." And they would say, "There is no evidence the galaxy disc precesses." And you would know that it has to, if it is to have a spherical atom-like presence. Plus what about that slight opposite warping visible in the disc-edges of most spiral galaxies?So now you're looking for stuff in each based on what you know of the other, andyou gain both ways.

Anyway science demands that a theory be testable. When stuff gets really small, it acts like particles under some conditions and like a wave under others. there are limits to our ability to measure position and velocity of really small stuff simultaneously. If you multiply the uncertainty about the position of really small stuff by the uncertainty of its momentum, the result can never be smaller that a certain fixed quantity. Any smaller and it seems either position or momentum falls out. We can't have a little galaxy the planets of which are nowhere can we? You may say that these apparent limitations are merely conceptual, but unless someone comes up with a conceptual model that works theoretically and is testable aren't we just whistling in the wind?

felix dakat wrote:Anyway science demands that a theory be testable. When stuff gets really small, it acts like particles under some conditions and like a wave under others. there are limits to our ability to measure position and velocity of really small stuff simultaneously. If you multiply the uncertainty about the position of really small stuff by the uncertainty of its momentum, the result can never be smaller that a certain fixed quantity. Any smaller and it seems either position or momentum falls out. We can't have a little galaxy the planets of which are nowhere can we? You may say that these apparent limitations are merely conceptual, but unless someone comes up with a conceptual model that works theoretically and is testable aren't we just whistling in the wind?

I don't know. What made people sail west of Gibraltar? William Herschel was convinced there were men living on the moon. Some dreams are realized, some aren't. Some theories are useful, some aren't. But when the idea of usefulness is used as an argument against dreaming... well, that's the beginning of the end for science. You just end up with Lysenkoism.

We can't have a little galaxy the planets of which are nowhere can we?

Sounds like you're taking Rasava's poetics pretty literally!

"Distraction is the only thing that consoles us for our miseries, and yet it is itself the greatest of our miseries." - Blaise Pascal

felix dakat wrote:Anyway science demands that a theory be testable. When stuff gets really small, it acts like particles under some conditions and like a wave under others. there are limits to our ability to measure position and velocity of really small stuff simultaneously. If you multiply the uncertainty about the position of really small stuff by the uncertainty of its momentum, the result can never be smaller that a certain fixed quantity. Any smaller and it seems either position or momentum falls out. We can't have a little galaxy the planets of which are nowhere can we? You may say that these apparent limitations are merely conceptual, but unless someone comes up with a conceptual model that works theoretically and is testable aren't we just whistling in the wind?

I don't know. What made people sail west of Gibraltar? William Herschel was convinced there were men living on the moon. Some dreams are realized, some aren't. Some theories are useful, some aren't. But when the idea of usefulness is used as an argument against dreaming... well, that's the beginning of the end for science. You just end up with Lysenkoism.

We can't have a little galaxy the planets of which are nowhere can we?

Sounds like you're taking Rasava's poetics pretty literally!

If you figure out a way to sail into the infinitely small or the infinitely large in this life time I salute you.

felix dakat wrote:Anyway science demands that a theory be testable. When stuff gets really small, it acts like particles under some conditions and like a wave under others. there are limits to our ability to measure position and velocity of really small stuff simultaneously. If you multiply the uncertainty about the position of really small stuff by the uncertainty of its momentum, the result can never be smaller that a certain fixed quantity. Any smaller and it seems either position or momentum falls out. We can't have a little galaxy the planets of which are nowhere can we? You may say that these apparent limitations are merely conceptual, but unless someone comes up with a conceptual model that works theoretically and is testable aren't we just whistling in the wind?

I don't know. What made people sail west of Gibraltar? William Herschel was convinced there were men living on the moon. Some dreams are realized, some aren't. Some theories are useful, some aren't. But when the idea of usefulness is used as an argument against dreaming... well, that's the beginning of the end for science. You just end up with Lysenkoism.

We can't have a little galaxy the planets of which are nowhere can we?

Sounds like you're taking Rasava's poetics pretty literally!

If you figure out a way to sail into the infinitely small or the infinitely large in this life time I salute you.

I can't walk through walls, either. But that doesn't mean walls aren't permeable!

"Distraction is the only thing that consoles us for our miseries, and yet it is itself the greatest of our miseries." - Blaise Pascal

rasava wrote:Felix: Science aims to be the "view from nowhere" but even it can't escape at least a smidgeon of social influence. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, because it's often our experience which helps us model facts better.

But science is being viewed through us, through a totally arbitrarily designed machine with totally arbitrarily sense organs, and thought processes and circuits and pain/pleasure circuits, etc. We are not some objective reference system measuring the world objectively, we are a slab of quirky Mass Enerrgy interacting in a quirky manner with another slab of quirky Mass Energy and measuring the events and cataloging and memorizing them as repetitive patterns in our "memory".

We are not "nowhere", we are a very specifically defined design, one very particular and quirky random design out of trillions of other possible designs (new designs that you can achieve by sticking wild chemicals, wild symbols and wild signals in the ball of meat that is the brain, as in Instant Singularity) interacting with itself, talking to itself basically since the slab of Matter that is outside or inside the other slab is arbitrarily defined, it is just matter talking to itself.

For a hammer, everything is a nail. Thought is like a hammer, for thought everything is just a thought itself, or another thought, or a logical sequence, or a sequence of symbols, or a logical entity or logical event. Everything is decomposed into the identity principle, to distinguish an item from another, same or different, interacting items, something exists as opposed to something different from itself, logic generates logic, a never ending recursion, tied into sensations, events, slabs of Mass Energy colliding with other slabs and creating language, thoughts and meanings all associated with memories, pain/pleasure circuits, past memories defining the present state of reality etc. Thought is our measuring device, we measure everything with our thought - logic - language, and measure our own thought constantly with the only measuring device we have. Any event and interaction is translated in a denotation, a symbol, a thought event, a sequence and process.

Anything can relate to anything, decompose thought itself, outside of your mind, external matter is crystallized thoughts, but thought is just a word anyways, another sequence of symbols, never ending, connections, interactions, events. The rock on the floor is the real mind and thought, your thought is simply a piece of trash on the sidewalk for the rock...

I can't walk through walls, either. But that doesn't mean walls aren't permeable!

It means they aren't permeable by you. [ Anon attempting to walk through a wall => ]

When I heard about QM in school, one ofthe things claimed was if you tried to walk throughthat wall enough times, there would be one timewhen you could- because of the inherentlyrandom nature of matter.

Atom/galaxy fractal universe would say the opposite.

There is detailed structure at every level. There isorder at every level. Magnetism acts to ordercharge which acts to order magnetism. Electrons being accelerated around a disc makes a magneticfield at right-angles to the acceleration, and thisfield wants the disc to precess in tandem with other nearbyfields. There is no way things can be random. Magnetspushed towards each other will ALWAYS interact- thatwall will NEVER let you walk through it.

All of matter is interconnected and always interconnecting.Electrons give off neutrino-like energies just like oursun, so those energies constantly go out from all matter. The protonsabsorb that same neutrino-like energy which isincoming from all the other matter and use itto constantly re-charge their electrons. So, energyis always coming in from everywhere and going out to everywhere!These energies reflect exactly what is happening atthe point of their emanation, so there is always detailedinformation flow at every point in space. Now, personally, I thinkthese smaller-caliber neutrinos would travel FTL, sincethey are "finer emanations", and thus wouldbe more permeable to space.

But, no, no matter how many times you contest yourhead against the wall, the wall wins.

But the galaxy model for the atom, while beingtotally classical, leads to powers overmatter that QM decided were impossible whenthey accepted the HUP.

The galaxy model says that atoms are discs, andthese rotating discs precess in order to sweep outtheir sphere of influence.

Imagine a long straight tube filled with spinningcoins. If the spins are random, you can never see to the endof the tube, but if you synchronise the spins, you can.So, the first step to synchronising the disc/atoms, is to recognizethey are discs.

So if atoms are little galaxies, every carbon atomin your body is another Milky Way. The life and intelligencein those mini-galaxies will be in our image, and theirlifetimes will be in tiny fractions of our seconds.Our hopes and fears of our present situation will resultin all different possibilities being played out in thosemini-worlds all the time. Can you imagine if we could tap into that kind of real-worldlaboratory? Any situation we were in, we could just run allthe possible outcomes of each decision before taking it.

What WOULD work, however, and it is very similar to what you are saying, is if all matter gave out a PUSH in all directions, and all matter absorbed an equal amount of PUSH from all directions. Then you do the whole LeSage thing, and if it is electron radiations at a smaller scale and higher speed, that works great! The protons absorb the gravitation/inertia and feed their electrons, which need to be fed constantly because they RADIATE.

There! Matter causes gravitation, but not local matter, so you do away with Black Holes and you have a limit to how much gravity can be experienced on a planet. Now that you have this limit, you have a lot of unseen matter at planet/suns' centers, and larger bodies appear to be much less dense than they are. So if you were to have a larger planet, such as Saturn, Jupiter, or Neptune, or a Sun, it would appear to be mostly gaseous when in fact it is rock and lava just like us.

Okay, I'm just rambling using large-scaleto fill in blanks about small scale and vice-versa,based on the assumption that atoms are little galaxiesand galaxies are large atoms.

You have a neutrino flux coming from all thestars. This energy passes through from all sidesall the time, everywhere. Now we're saying electronsare made from a billion stars in that little galaxy that is an atom.So, we also have a flux of energy just like neutrinos,but 10^27 times smaller, although also 10^27 times morenumerous, coming through everywherefrom all sides.

This smaller flux pushes on protons and is absorbedby them to feed the electrons. Gravity? Surelooks like it. These could bethe 'ultra-mundane' particles required for LeSage Gravity.Meanwhile, the neutrino flux goes right through matterbut must be being absorbed by galactic centers,and therefore pushing on them.So it will be the neutrino flux that is pushinggalaxies apart. Dark Energy? Neutrinos.

Anyway, pretty soon after I got the idea thatatoms must possess intelligence, I realized thatno two molecules can be alike. When our bodytakes proteins apart and re-constitutes themas our own tissue, there is a memory of whatthey were. That memory can be good or it canbe bad. If it's bad, then your body could have issuesdown the road.

Check out what I just found withthe Benzene construction-This view is a split-screen of my Benzene construction at 320 degrees of ring rotation showing a SouthEast viewpoint on the left and a NorthWest viewpoint on the right. http://users.accesscomm.ca/john/bb320.jpg

The only thing that changes are the disc numbers and the origin arrows!!

I could animate this and view it fromany two diametrically-opposed viewpoints,and the two images would be identical!

It will either be intriguing or boring.If intriguing, I'll look at a SW/NE split-screen,maybe.

The fact that this ring arrangementremains identical for any twobackwards/forwards viewpoints isextremely encouraging for the atom/galaxyconcept. I will post the upcoming animationas soon as it is finished.